Andy Burnham’s Manchesterism: A defining spirit Britain needs

The Smiths’ song “London” captures the ambivalence of a Mancunian traveling to the capital, a theme that resonates with Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham’s political journey. Burnham, a known fan of the band, may recognize the song’s encapsulation of his decision to seek a seat in Parliament.

Eleven years ago, Burnham was a candidate for the Labour leadership alongside Jeremy Corbyn, staging a launch event at Ernst & Young’s London headquarters. He then said he might back further benefit cuts, claiming too many people associated Labour with “giving people who don’t want to help themselves an easy ride.” In 2022, he told columnist John Harris that was the result of bad advice: “I listened to people that I shouldn’t have, really. It was tone-deaf … it wasn’t me. It wasn’t authentic.”

Since becoming mayor of Greater Manchester in 2017, Burnham has shown increasing certainty and self-confidence, deepening engagement with centre-left forces like Compass. His ability to connect with diverse crowds was evident at recent Glastonbury appearances. His most important attribute, Harris argues, is a wealth of actual ideas – a contrast with Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s dead end.

Speaking at the Great North Investment Summit in Leeds, Burnham lamented people’s loss of faith in politics and reiterated his argument that Britain has been on the wrong path for 40 years. He pointed to “draining away of economic, social and political power” from northern England, compounded by “deregulation, privatisation … and austerity,” and local wealth siphoned “into the hands of people for whom life was already very good.” Signs include “people paying over the odds for the daily basics: energy, housing, water, transport.”

This critique forms the basis of “Manchesterism,” Burnham’s work-in-progress credo that references 19th-century Manchester liberalism. It emphasizes deindustrialization and the convulsions of the 1980s, with Margaret Thatcher referenced in his first campaign video. It stresses social housing and argues that rising welfare bills reflect economic failure, not national delinquency.

Burnham insists modern capitalism is cynically extractive and socially damaging, echoing Ed Miliband’s distinction between “predators” and “producers.” His Manchesterism also offers a specifically English critique of broken politics and power, a space previously monopolized by Nigel Farage, stemming from Burnham’s reinvention as a political outsider.

The core concept is “the productive state,” defined by Mathew Lawrence, director of Common Wealth. Lawrence says: “Where the market coordinates and the welfare state redistributes, the productive state produces: directly owning and operating capital in essential sectors, participating in markets as builder and provider rather than as regulator or redistributor. It is the return of sovereign economic control of the economy’s foundations.”

This principle is reflected in Burnham’s pledge to bring energy and utilities under “stronger public control” and inspired the Bee Network of yellow buses with uniform £2 fares. The network brings order to a transport system torn apart by the Thatcher government’s 1986 deregulation. As Harris notes, Burnham is set on “rolling back the 80s.”

While Manchester is not a progressive utopia – with rough sleepers near expensive apartments and a north-south income gap – Burnham’s Manchesterism builds on regeneration successes led by former city council leader Richard Leese and chief executive Howard Bernstein. It evokes a city center where consumerism coexists with an entrepreneurial and collectivist culture – a spirit Harris says the UK could use more of.

In response to Burnham’s radicalism, Labour leader Keir Starmer’s team is shifting, evidenced by Rachel Reeves’ commitment to a summer of cost-of-living activism and Wes Streeting’s conversion to a wealth tax. Burnham’s critics sneeringly reference the gilt market and question the cost of his agenda.

Harris personally appreciates Manchesterism for its ferocity, energy, and sense of purpose, comparing it to the Smiths song. He questions what would happen if Burnham became prime minister and how he would reorient Whitehall to deliver his vision.

Harris concludes that Burnham’s ideas have brought ideological oomph and hope to a Labour party in danger of reducing politics to technocratic misery – and for that, the country should be thankful.